Wednesday Caption Contest: Part 168.

First signs of a post-election rift over the financial crisis between President George W. Bush(L) and Barack Obama, seen here meeting on November 10, 2008, emerged Tuesday after the president-elect pressed for urgent aid to ailing auto giants.
(AFP/Tim Sloan)

This really deserves a more creative caption. What is with that shadow?

Entries will remain open until 11:59 PM, Central Standard Time, Tuesday, November 18. Submit your captions in the comments section, or email via WILLisms@gmail.com.

Good Morning to you sir:
My name is Abu Jayad, and I am head of the Obama campaign office here in Gaza. I and several of my friends have raised the sum of $150,000,000.00 USD for the 13th Imam Obama, and need to transfer these funds to him.
If you will agree to provide your bank account number, I will transfer the entire sum to you, along with a computer program containing a credit card number and 750,000 addresses with which to transfer this money.
In return for your gracious help, you may retain the sum of $15,000,000 USD for yourself. After Mr Obamas taxes that will surely leave you enough to fill the tank in your SUV.

Trivia Tidbit of the Day: Part 514 -- Middle Class Taxes.

One key to economic revival is tax relief for the middle class. Or so goes the mantra as repeated again Friday by President-elect Obama. But what the middle class ends up paying to the federal government has fallen dramatically over the past eight years.

Middle class tax cuts are great policy. They're even better politics, given that about 75% of Americans believe they are middle class.

If Obama cuts taxes for 95% of those currently paying taxes, way awesome. If he does it at the expense of the other 5%, not awesome. If he really intends to give "tax cuts" to 95% of all Americans, including those who already pay nothing in taxes, way not awesome.

The beauty of the Bush tax cuts: everyone got tax cuts. If there's one downside of them, it's that too many people got taken off the rolls entirely.

Interestingly, Scott Rasmussen, the most accurate pollster from 2008, asserts that over the past 40 years, the candidate who has promised lower taxes more credibly has won every single time (WSJ editorial):

Mr. Obama's tax-cutting message played a key role in this period of economic anxiety. Tax cuts are well-received at such times: 55% of voters believe they are good for the economy. Only 19% disagree and see them as bad policy.

Down the campaign homestretch, Mr. Obama's tax-cutting promise became his clearest policy position. Eventually he stole the tax issue from the Republicans. Heading into the election, 31% of voters thought that a President Obama would cut their taxes. Only 11% expected a tax cut from a McCain administration.

The last Democratic candidate to win the tax issue was also the last Democratic president -- Bill Clinton. In fact, the candidate who most credibly promises the lowest level of taxes has won every presidential election in at least the last 40 years.

Barack Obama somehow convinced three times more voters than John McCain that he would cut their taxes. It's just incredible. He even convinced more conservative voters of the same thing.

Obama ran a truly tabula rasa campaign-- because he was so ambiguous, he could be all things to all people. Because he had such a thin record and never really took a tough stand on just about anything, voters could see whatever they wanted to see. Now that he's going to be in charge, there's no way he can be all things to all people.